Sadler J Z, Hulgus Y F, Agich G J
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas 75235.
J Med Philos. 1994 Jun;19(3):261-77. doi: 10.1093/jmp/19.3.261.
The DSM-IV, like its predecessors, will be a major influence on American psychiatry. As a consequence, continuing analysis of its assumptions is essential. Review of the manuals as well as conceptually-oriented literature on DSM-III, DSM-III-R, and DSM-IV reveals that the authors of these classifications have paid little attention to the explicit and implicit value commitments made by the classifications. The response to DSM criticisms and controversy has often been to incorporate more scientific diversity into the classification, instead of careful inquiry and assessment of the principal values that drive the nosologic process. Implications for psychiatric science and future DSM classifications are discussed.
《精神疾病诊断与统计手册第四版》（DSM-IV）与其先前版本一样，将对美国精神病学产生重大影响。因此，持续分析其假设至关重要。对这些手册以及关于《精神疾病诊断与统计手册第三版》（DSM-III）、《精神疾病诊断与统计手册第三版修订版》（DSM-III-R）和《精神疾病诊断与统计手册第四版》的概念导向文献进行回顾后发现，这些分类的作者很少关注分类所做出的明确和隐含的价值承诺。对DSM批评和争议的回应往往是在分类中纳入更多科学多样性，而不是对驱动疾病分类过程的主要价值观进行仔细探究和评估。本文还讨论了对精神病学科学和未来DSM分类的影响。
